Optimism Following Oral Arguments in NLRB Recess Appointments Case

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments Jan. 13 in the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) recess appointments case (Noel Canning). The oral arguments centered on a lower court ruling that held President Obama’s early 2012 recess appointments of three members to the NLRB were unconstitutional. More background information on the Noel Canning case and ABC National’s involvement can be found on the ABC website.

An attorney who represents both ABC National and the ABC-led Coalition for a Democratic Workforce, Josh Ulman, attended Monday’s oral argument and observed that the tone and nature of the questioning suggests that the Supreme Court Justices have serious doubts about the federal government’s position. “While it is hard to predict case outcomes based on oral arguments, after today I am even more optimistic that the Court will rule to uphold the lower court’s decision in Noel Canning,” said Josh Ulman. Read the questions posed by the Supreme Court Justices here.

If the U.S. Supreme Court upholds the Noel Canning decision, the ruling could invalidate all decisions issued under the terms of the unlawful recess appointees.

Please visit the SCOTUSBlog for articles providing an overview and analysis of the oral arguments. In addition, the transcript is available for download and audio will be available later this week on the Supreme Court website.